ArticleBMJ open2022
Key items for reports of primary care research: an international Delphi study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist supports family medicine research in South Korea.Korean journal of family medicine · 2026Article
- The CRISP Translation Guide for Research-Reporting Guidelines.Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Improving primary care research reporting: Introducing the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care checklist.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2025Article
- Reporting study results in primary health care: the CRISP guidelines.Primary health care research & development · 2024Article
- Assessing parent-child interaction with deaf and hard of hearing infants aged 0-3 years: An international multi-professional e-Delphi.PloS one · 2024Article
- Pilot test of Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary care (CRISP).Primary health care research & development · 2023Article
- Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement.Annals of family medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveReporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research.
designDelphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group.
settingInternational online survey.
participantsInterdisciplinary PC researchers and research users.
main outcome measuresWe drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses.
results98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items).
conclusionOur Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.